The URL can be used to link to this page

B-1. 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance Requestz, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Dw-0�H PC DATE:: Oeteaer— 7, 2044 January 6, 2015 CC DATE: Oetebe. 272014 (ifno January 26, 2015 (if neccessary) REVIEW DEADLINE: Po,.,,nibe . 13, 201 February 3, 2015 CASE #: 2014-27 BY: AF, RG, DI, TJ, ML, JM, JS PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the hard surface coverage and shoreland setback variance requests and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision " SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The property owner is requesting a hard surface coverage variance to increase an approved one percent variance for hard surface coverage. The property owner is also requesting a shoreland setback variance in addition to an approved 32-foot shoreland setback variance. This item was tabled at the October 7, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting. LOCATION: 9015 Lake Riley Blvd (PID 25-0240300) h <� APPLICANT: Phillip J. Sosnowski and Rosemary F. Kelly 9015 Lake Riley Blvd P O Box 490 Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Single Family Residential (RSF). 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density (Net density 1.2 — 4 0 units per acre) ACREAGE: 0 29 acres (12,632 squafe feet) (12,900 square feet) DENSITY: NA LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION -MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oetabef7,-20-1-4 January 6, 2015 Page 2 of 11 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY This item appeared before the Planning Commission on October 7, 2014 and was tabled to allow the applicant to work with staff. Additional information was provided that showed the original requested hard coverage was underestimated. Following is the original staff report with revisions shown in strikethrough and bold format The property currently has 3,324 square feet of hardcover (25.8 percent). The property owner is requesting an a variance to add an additional 4-.9 4.2 percent hard surface coverage vafianee to the property. This is in addition to an apprvariance, if approved, would expand the approved one percent variance for hard surface coverage to a 5.0 percent variance from the 25 percent hard surface coverage maximum (a total var-ianee of 2 9 reree„t). The addition will put the total hard surface coverage of the property at 2-7-.9 30.0 percent The property owner is also requesting to encroach an additional 7 feet into the shoreland setback level. If approved, this request would increase the approved 32-foot shoreland setback variance. The expansion would put the new shoreland setback at 36 feet (a 39-foot variance from the required 75-foot shoreland setback. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article VIl, Shoreland Management District Section 20-480, Zoning and water supply/sanitary provisions Section 20-481, Placement, design, and height of structure Chapter 20, Article XII "RSF" Single -Family Residential District Section 20-615 Lot requirements and setbacks BACKGROUND The Single -Family Residential District Chapter of City Code states, "the maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is 25 percent " The Shoreland Management District Chapter of City Code requires sewered structures on recreational development public waters to be setback 75 feet from the ordinary high water level. On May 17, 2005, the City of Chanhassen approved a five-foot front yard setback variance, a 32- foot shoreland setback variance and a 1 % hard surface coverage variance for the demolition and construction of a new single-family home (Planning Case 42005-10) The applicant originally requested a 7 68% hard surface coverage variance and 41 3-foot Shoreland setback variance, but the Planning Commission reduced these variance requests for approval. The proposed patio would expand on the shoreland setback and hard surface coverage variation Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oetebef 7;2014 January 6, 2015 Page 3 of 11 ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing a 240 551 square -foot patio te-beleeated expansion to an existing 176 square -foot patio in the rear yard This expanded non -conformity would put the property over the allowed hard surface coverage maximum by 9 5.0 percent The applicant is also proposing to extend the patio beyond the existing setback by theee 7 feet, locating the patio within 40 36 feet of the lakeshore's ordinary high water level The proposed patio would encroach into the required 75-foot shoreland setback by -3-5 39 feet The applicant is requesting the patio expansion to create a wheelchair -accessible patio and to Ott maintain aesthetic alignment with the houseHowever-, The existing property has an approximately 13.5-foot by 13-foot (176 square foot) concrete patio beneath the four -season porch This area currently can be used as a wheelchair -accessible outdoor living area on the property (see images e :the fieX4 page - below) The door located beneath the deck has a 3-foot by 8-foot pad and the door off the garage does not have a landing pad. The property owner is concerned that neither of these two doors can be used by someone with physical limitations. The applicant's request is to connect the patio beneath the porch to the area in front of the door beneath the deck and the area in front of the garage door with a concrete patio (see door locations and proposal on the next page) Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oeteber"�?�4 January 6, 2015 Page 4 of 11 House Exits/Entrances ISM I1FIRf.T�"...: The ettffen4 building at 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard is at a higher elevation than the neighboring building to the north, 9005 Like Riley Boulevard The northern 10 feet of the property contain a drainage and utility easement, which acts as the Emergency Overflow (EOF) for the stormwater pond across the street. Water flows between the two houses and down to Lake Riley This location has a recent history of stormwater issues On June 19, 2014, a rainfall event caused the stormwater pond to overflow and flood the property to the north, 9005 Lake Riley Boulevard Water surrounded the house and leaked into the basement The city's Public Works Department sandbagged the area during the storm to prevent further damage. The reason for the shoreland setback and hardcover limitation is to protect the city's natural resources through limiting runoff into public waters Allowing a setback and hard surface expansion beyond the existing conditions could be harmful to the natural resources of the area and increase surface water runoff issues This property was originally given a variance for a front yard setback, shoreland setback and hard surface coverage The proposed variance would increase the existing legal non -conformity of the presently functional property. As seen bele on the next page, there have been multiple parcels surrounding this property that have requested variances Within 500 feet of the subject property, staff noted four variance requests Of these variance requests, one was for the subject property. Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oetebef 7204 January 6, 2015 Page 5 of 11 Variance Number Address Description Action Request for an addition to a non - VAR 85-21 9005 Lake Riley Blvd conforming building (encroaching into Withdrawn front and rear yard setbacks). VAR 90-07 9051 Lake Riley Blvd. 10 35-foot shoreland setback variance for Approved the construction of a new home 36-foot shoreland/rear yard setback for VAR 92-09 9021 Lake Riley Blvd the construction of a deck and hot tub to Approved be located 39 feet from the lake 5-foot front yard setback variance, 10 percent hard surface coverage variance and CAS 05-10 9015 Lake Riley Blvd a 32-foot shoreland setback variance for the Approved (subject property) demolition and rebuilding of a single- family home on a non -conforming property (minimum area) (continued on next page) Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oetebef 7, 2014 January 6, 2015 Page 6 of 11 Of the shoreland properties within 500 feet of the subject site, three properties have hard surface coverage that exceeds 25.8 percent (the subject property's hard surface coverage), with the largest being at 29.3 percent hard surface coverage (the subject property is proposing 30.0 percent hard surface coverage). Additionally, four properties in this area have a shoreland setback that extends within the required 75-foot setback; however, none of these properties have a shoreland setback less than 43 feet (the subject property is proposing a 36-foot shoreland setback). Hard Surface Coverage and Shoreland Setbacks of Shoreland Properties within 500 feet of the Subject Property it if TV 1 1- 22 9% HSC 60' Setback (Subject Site) 2.5 8% HSC 43' Setback 27.1% HSC 43' Setback 29 3% HSC 43' Setback 16 0% HSC 75' Setback 27 1% HSC 58' Setback Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oeteber- 7, 2014 January 6, 2015 Page 7 of 11 The subject property has an area of 12,900 square feet. This is significantly smaller than the 20,000 square -foot minimum required by city code for single-family riparian lots (Sec. 20-480). Of the shoreland properties within 500 feet of the subject property, there are three other properties that do not meet the minimum square footage requirement for riparian lots (see yellow outlined properties in the image below). Lot Sizes of S lore and Properties withui 500-feet of the Subject Property ' *427.602 s f t` ' ``''•"� I" ARM 31� rTT- 16,988 s.f. Sublect Proper • _ - 20,038 s.f. `' t �v . 18,731 s f - i 1r ' 4 20,909 s,f. f 14,375 s f t r Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Oetober- 7, 2014 January 6, 2015 Page 8of11 MORELAND MANAGEMENT Lake Riley is classified as a recreational development lake with an ordinary high water elevation (OHW) of 865.3 feet The setback fiom the OHW is 75 feet as required by state statute and city code. A variance was granted to allow for the construction of the house This variance allowed for the house to encroach 32 feet into this setback. The house is currently setback 43 feet from the OHW at its closest point The ded plan gave dimensfons and was meonsistent 4 the aefial photograph sh.,[[,,, t the fight - A review of the plans indicates that a four -season porch was approved in the fall of 2011 to extend an additional 13 feet beyond what was shown as the building footprint in the plan provided. This is shown in green on in the figure 2 below The porch addition was consistent with the approved hard surface and setback variance The approved deck was to continue as the east wall of the four -season porch extended northward 19 feet The gafage [,..,ll lee ted t the noAheast eomef of the house, is the one eenstant between the two plans and was used as the S Seale, extends an additional 21 25 feet t.,[[,.,,.,1 the lake f oy.-, the i ''� _ �Y" 1� -., vvv w vv ui uo i wall This 1 tbaek the nu3xI cgcrccr�-ir�ccvtccirzrvrrrcir�--vrr�w-ter �,Tns,r olf 3_0_feet u,.[[ eve, given the 1 1 f ditnens:onfng the dfawfflg oil and the d�^rlt[1 between what is shown On the ided the nl, t is .1 f I t t provided plan and aev, wro.rr �, Q1e +pfty, t11 i , does µppeaf to be 43 Vet as stated 11 the s ^p,.1,e do that ,s the distance t the as it �122IST SeaSE)14 ffOM the O A%. �v r� m m tin � `• s;.,. ai:.3 wa POTeh TltT.LLriGe LIIt stem fom GIs mrr�.r mkt. w,:si�rw. H.LwL.lan ✓ vvai�iv via YY 1 YY N. Y with what was sealed The proposed patio extends an additional r� 7 feet towards the lake from the existing t _t deck. This equals a setback from the -' OHW of 36 feet. Residential properties are allowed one water -oriented structure no greater than 250 square feet in area within the setback, provided it is at least 10 feet from the OHW Water -oriented structures are included in hard surface coverage calculations for the property. However, the proposed patio is not considered a water -oriented structure as it is attached to the primary structure. Furthermore, Tthe size of this patio (existing and proposed) isestim4ed- to be in exeessof 730 feet eat!ly three tifne lar-gee than allowed751 square feet, over three times larger than what is allowed for a water -oriented structure. A deck is not considered impervious and the area below the deck currently has a grass surface (besides the concrete door step pad) This encroachment into the setback and the additional hardcover area will only add to the degradation of the lake and the increase in runoff volumes, rates and pollutant load into Lake Riley. The aforementioned June storms saw significant damage along the shoreline that can be attributed to urbanization of the lakeshore area. Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance - Planning Case 2014-27 Oete}ef 7, 2814 January 6, 2015 Page 9 of 11 ALTERNATIVE PLAN Through conversations between city staff and the applicant, a reasonable alternative plan has been created in case the Planning Commission finds that a hard surface coverage variance request is acceptable; however, no further encroachment into the shoreland setback is supported by staff. The alternative plan, favored by staff, reduces the hardcover variance request and does not require an additional shoreland setback variance (see image below). The alternative proposal would expand the patio under the existing deck and to the northerly patio door in line with the existing setback. The addition will add 354 square feet (2.7 percent) of hard surface coverage to the property, but will maintain the existing 43- foot shoreland setback. The hardcover expansion will put the total property hardcover at 28.5 percent. The hard surface coverage expansion (see gray area in the image below) will require a 3.5 percent hard surface coverage variance from the 25 percent hardcover maximum for shoreland properties, a 2.5 percent expansion from the approved 26 percent hardcover variance (bringing the total hardcover to 28.5 percent). An issue expressed by the property owner is the lack of usable outdoor space. To add outdoor space without adding hard surface coverage, the property owner can install a retaining wall within the shoreland setback (it must be set back at least 10 feet from the OHW) and complete earthwork in the rear yard to make a flat grass area to the east of the patio (between the patio and the lake -see green area below). Any grading and retaining wall installed will require a permit and plans to be submitted to the City. Existing j I t _�_ I_ I_. I 1 �t Hardcover I I House - --- _ ! Patio Expansion —f I ' Hardcover Removed from Plan, Green Space �-;- � - Patio Expansion will maintain existing 43' Retaining Wall -_, j 1 �--,,---..-?_ .{�� .� ' _ shoreland setback Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance - Planning Case 2014-27 netebef 7,-2-014 January 6, 2015 Page 10 of 11 SUMMARY root of the 0143x' The variance from the OHW setback requirements is for 39 feet, extending an additional 7 feet from the existing approved variance setback of 32 feet. The current impervious surface coverage already exceeds the allowed 25% percent maximum for shoreland properties. JV the �,,,,,,a,., ver- lexistinghafdeavef V Y�1 feet fneaning they afe fequesting mefe than 525 squafe feet of additiona4 i ' itiffaee within the sots.aek f , the nThe proposed expansion will add 551 square feet of hardcover to the property (a 4.2 percent expansion). If approved, the total hardcover for the property will be 30.0 percent. This will put the property 5.0 percent over the 25 percent hardcover maximum for shoreland properties. This area has a recent history of drainage problems that could directly impact the neighboring properties depending on the grading, which was not included in the plan submittal Additional impervious surface would create additional untreated stormwater runoff discharging to Lake Riley Urbanization of the shoreline has contributed to erosion problems along Lake Riley To avoid adding water to an area that has confirmed drainage issues, and adding to the degradation of Lake Riley, the Engineering Department does not recommend approval of the impervious surface variance RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the variance requests and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and Decision Should the Planning Commission approve a hard surface coverage variance, it is recommended that the approval be for a 3 percent hard surface coverage variance to permit 28.5 percent hardcover on the property and deny the additional shoreland setback variance and adopt the Findings of Fact and Decision for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive the appropriate permit required from the City. This permit will include a revised survey that displays the location of the patio addition, a completed hard surface coverage calculation worksheet and any other plans required for the permit. 2. Landscape materials must be installed to absorb additional runoff on the property. Planning Commission 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance — Planning Case 2014-27 Ae-tober7, 2014 January 6, 2015 Page 11 of 11 ATTACHMENTS 1 Findings of Fact and Decision 2. Development Review Application 3 Landscaping Plan. 4. Email from Nancy Smith to Bob Generous dated September 8, 2014. 5 Letter from Joan Ludwig to Chanhassen Planning Commission, Bob Generous, and Rose Kelly dated September 9, 2014 6. Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice 7. Extension request dated October 7, 2014. 8. Extension request dated November 3, 2014. 9. Letter from Rose Kelly dated December 22, 2014. 10. To scale drawing of proposal from Rose Kelly. 11. Sketch Map g \plan\2014 planning cases\2014-27 9015 lake riley blvd variance\staff report 9015 lake riley blvd doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE Application of Phillip J Sosnowski and Rosemary F Kelly for a variance from the shoreland setback requirements and hard surface coverage to allow for a 551 square -foot patio on property zoned Single -Family Residential District (RSF) — Planning Case 2014-27 n january 6, 2015, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following - FINDINGS OF FACT 1 The property is currently zoned Single -Family Residential District (RSF). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density 3. The legal description of the property is. P/O GOVT LOT 3 DESC AS - COMM AT NW CORN GOVT LOT 3 TH S ON W LINE 1293 86' TH N89*E 16' TH S 249.23' TH N89*E 49 60' TH N 247 8T TH N89*E 714.51' TH N20*E 304.42' TH N14*E 470 07' TH N13*E 11 86' TH N44*E 64.01' TO INTERSECT WITHLINE BEARING N13*E FROM N 4 Variance Findings — Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance• a Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan Finding: The subject site is zoned Single -Family Residential District. The purpose of the request is to permit a 39-foot shoreland setback variance and 5 0 percent hard surface coverage variance to allow a 551 square -foot patio expansion While multiple properties in this area encroach into the shoreland setback, including this property, permitting additional encroachment into the shoreland setback is unnecessary for the functional use of the property The property also has a functioning 13 5-foot by 13-foot patio on the property that currently serves as an outdoor space. b When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems Finding: Requesting to expand an existing patio is not a practical difficulty in meeting with City Code The property has already been granted variances for hardcover and shoreland setbacks. The site currently has a patio and its expansion is due to a mere convenience c That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone Finding: The purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone The stated intent is to expand a patio for wheelchair accessible use d The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner Finding: The use of the lot is limited due to its size and depth; however, the property has already been granted a variance for its construction, allowing them a reasonable use of the property Any additional expansions of this non -conformity would be created by the property owner The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality Finding: The granting of the variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. Multiple properties in the area encroach into the shoreland setback However, since there already exists surface water runoff issues in the area, expanding hard surface may increase the runoff problem. f Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter Finding: This does not apply to this request. 5 The planning report #2014-27, dated January 6, 2014, prepared by Drew Ingvalson, et al, is incorporated herein. 2 DECISION "The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustment, denies Planning Case #2014-17 a 39-foot setback variance from the 75-foot shoreland setback requirement and 5 0 percent hard surface coverage variance from the 25 percent requirement to allow a 551 square -foot patio on a property zoned Single -Family Residential District " ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 6t1' day of January, 2015 CITY OF CHANHASSEN :• Chairman COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P O Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone- (952) 227-1300 / Fax- (952) 227-1110 4kx� ? C ok,60s7- I C) CITY OF CHANHASSEN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Date Filed Z I_ I�—`T 60-Day Review Deadline 10— l"C • Application' ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment $600 ❑ Minor MUSA line for falling on -site sewers $100 ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Single -Family Residence $325 ❑ All Others $425 ❑ Interim Use Permit ❑ In conjunction with Single -Family Residence $325 ❑ All Others $425 ❑ Rezoning ❑ Planned Unit Development (PUD) $750 ❑ Minor Amendment to existing PUD $100 ❑ All Others .. .................... $500 ❑ Sign Plan Review $150 Planner ❑ Subdivision Case # I — �;q ❑ Create 3 lots or less .... ...$300 ❑ Create over 3 lots $600 + $15 per lot ❑ Metes & Bounds $300 + $50 per lot ❑ Consolidate Lots $150 ❑ Lot Line Adjustment $150 ❑ Final Plat* $250 *Requires additional $450 escrow for attorney costs Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract ❑ Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way $300 (Additional recording fees may apply) ❑✓ Variance $200 ❑ Wetland Alteration Permit ❑ Single -Family Residence $150 ❑ All Others . .......................................... . $275 ❑ Site Plan Review ❑ Zoning Appeal $100 ❑ Administrative $100 ❑ Commercial/Industrial Districts* .................... $500 ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment $500 Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area NOTE. When multiple applications are processed concurrently, Include number of existing employees the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application and number of new employees ❑ Residential Districts ............. $500 (Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal Plus $5 per dwelling unit information that must accompany this application) ADDITIONAL REQUIRED FEES - Notification Sign $200 (City to install and remove) -C'39 (� Property Owners' List within 500' $3 per address \ (City to generate — fee determined at pre -application meeting) Escrow for Recording Documents Q4er document (CUP/SPRNACJ/AP/Metes & Bounds Subdivision) TOTAL FEES: $ t-i-m Received from Rt�noaci Date Received '9 tISI lLt Check Number _ Project Name Patio Proposal Property Address or Location. 9015 Lake Riley Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Parcel # 250240300 Legal Description Lot 3, Sec 24, T 116 North, R 23 Total Acreage •22 Wetlands Present? ❑ Yes ❑✓ No Present Zoning Present Land Use Designation Residential Existing Use of Property Residential Description of Proposal. See separate narrative Residential Requested Zoning Residential Requested Land Use Designation Residential ❑Q Check box if separate narrative is attached APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER- In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. If this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct Name, Contact Address Phone City/State/Zip- Cell Email Fax. Signature- Date PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct Name. Rosemary Kelly and Phillip Sosnowski Contact Rose Kelly Address 9015 Lake Riley Blvd Phone (952) 353-4691 City/State/Zip Chanhassen, MN 55317 cell (612) 360-8700 Email. rkelly071 @gmall.com Fax (612) 467-1920 Signature ec��%��t�,�_.aie• $/11/14 This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) Name Address Contact Phone City/State/Zip Cell Email' Fax Who should receive copies of staff reports? *Other Contact Information Q Property Owner Via F1 Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Name ❑ Applicant Via ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Address _ ❑ Engineer Via. ❑ Email [:]Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip ❑ Other* Via ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Email k6, SGANNEU Proposal Patio Construction Location: 9015 Lake Riley Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Variance Request We are requesting the construction of a patio (see attached design) be allowed as an addition to our single family home in Chanhassen The planned construction plan is attached We are requesting a 240 sq ft variance for allowed hard space to build a wheelchair accessible patio In addition, as the original construction of the house was permitted a 32 feet variance from the required 75 foot setback, this proposal was designed to stay within that limitation The proposed patio is setback 43 feet from the lake, within the limitation of --- thecurrentvariance However, we are also requiring a variance to allow for an additional 3 feet setback to allow construction a curve of the patio for 8 4 feet to permit aesthetic alignment with the house The current hard space for the house Overall Gross area to OHW = 14,650 sq ft Right of way = 1,750 sq ft Net area = 12,900 sq ft Building area = 2,225 sq ft Concrete pad = 27 sq ft Retaining walls = 55 sq ft Stoop area = 89 sq. ft. 4 season porch area = 176 sq ft Sidewalk area = 170 sq ft Driveway area = 612 sq ft Total current impervious surface area = 3,354 sq ft Rationale. This variance request is to ask for an additional 240 square feet of hard surface to allow continuity between existing hard space and wheelchair accessibility to the patio The reason for the patio construction is to make the lake and lawn on the lakeside of the house handicap accessible in alignment with the overall concept and construction of the house The previous owner clearly designed the house to be handicap accessible However, financial limitations kept the original owner from constructing a reasonable access from the house to the lake even though the setback permitted such a construction and the additional hard space is minimal (240 sq ft.) Lack of a level, even surface to exit the house limits the usability of the lake and lawn to anyone who is handicapped This is because the lawn immediately slopes and is uneven There is no means of outside handicap access to the lake except directly onto sloping lawn There is already hard surface immediately under the deck and the four season porch, but these surfaces are not connected and under constant shade. This proposal requests permission to simply connect these two areas with a level material to improve safety and access. It is a limited extension of current patio construction in keeping with the aesthetics of the house design and within the original construction setback variance This request for 240 sq ft variance of additional hard space is in harmony with the handicap accessible construction that was not SCANNED completed by the original builder This construction deficiency has become more apparent as we witness my 90 year old mother being unable to safely get out of the house to enjoy the being outside at the lake. Conditions meeting variance requirements. 1 We are requesting a 1 9 % variance to the current hard space zoning in order to construct a limited, level patio to improve our home handicap accessibility In addition, we are requesting a set back of an additional 3 feet for 8.4 feet in length to provide an aesthetic aspect to the construction This construction is consistent with the design and intent of the original construction of a handicap accessible lake home but not completed originally due to financial limitations of the homeowner. We bought the house 4 years ago because the design was entirely handicap accessible As we made small changes to our house, it was always in alignment with this design Now, as we look to accommodate my elderly mother and our own health limitations, these features of the house are particularly important We plan to stay in this home the rest of our lives and we purchased it with that intention We wish to improve design and accessibility of the house to the lake by completing a handicap accessible patio on the lake side of the house In addition, the current concrete patio has a step down that is not level with the doors making is impossible to navigate with a wheelchair so we wish to resolve this technical problem at the same time This request to increase hard surface is by a very limited amount and is extended beyond the already existing hard surface to include a small area that allows for sun This proposal benefits handicapped and wheelchair bound individuals and remains consistent with the comprehensive plan of the original house design 2 The practical difficulty with compliance of the current zoning is that the hard space limitations keep us from completing a level, connected, safe patio area in order to make it wheelchair accessible Currently, it is not possible for a handicapped person to get outside the house safely onto a level surface. We wish to correct this problem in an effort to align the house with its original handicap accessible design and facilitate access for ourselves and handicapped family members We believe this proposal is a request to use the property in a reasonable manner not currently permitted by limitations on hard surface for this property 3 This proposal is not based on economic considerations It is based on personal consideration for handicap accessibility for current family members and ourselves 4 The house design was left incomplete by the original owner We are asking for the variance to hard surface allowance by only 240 sq ft to improve the overall design of the house and to comply with the original intent of handicap accessibility Inability to provide access to the lake will create a current and ongoing hardship for full utilization of the property that we did not create 5 This is a very small scale patio that will only increase the hard surface of the house by 240 sq ft The proposal is designed to create an aesthetically appropriate addition while improving the function of the house The variance, if granted, would not alter in any way the essential character of the locality 6 This house is not an earth -sheltered construction SCANNED I6 Zagreb Coreopsis 3 Barberry'Orange Rocket' Boulders in the Landscape I Felix 5 preme Peony Ex tree / bed edging could *€ go around this tree ra .b. 13 Walker's Low Catrrxnt „ Ex Landscape Ex Landscape x 40 AC 5tone Edging ' Paver Banding Street Mal Box steps X-q- re"rdge� stoira Fx Lax Sidewal entry garden hose 5 Feather Peed 'Karl Foereter' 5 Sedum Autumn Delght Existing Deck Steps repair surken slob roS wK'gVD anJ�:ai ao.ib .wb Pon Fe& 0 5 p 20 SCALE N FEET Driveway Current Hard Surface Coverage Garage Ex Laura IF Note. Patio would only add 240sq! to existing hdwdsurface square footage. Annobelle Hydrangea ..,a° Stone Sitting Walla or Block Sitting Wall , a Ex \ Paver Banding Stone Sitting WaQ or o Block Sitting Wall e o Ex o Ex. Laura SCANNED Generous, Bob From N R [nsmith3587@msn com] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 12 35 PM To Generous, Bob Subject: 9015 Lake Riley Blvd Hi Bob, We have no issues with the variance Rosemary Kelly is requesting. The water issue is really more the holding pond that created the flooding this year. This should be addressed by the city Thank you, Nancy Smith 9051 Lake Riley Blvd. 1 TO. Chanhassen Planning Commission Bob Generous Rose Kelly FROM- Joan Ludwig, 9005 Lake Riley Blvd., Chanhassen, MN 9/16/14 RE. Requested Variance at 9015 Lake Riley Blvd I am the neighbor to the north of this address My concern about the proposed variance is my When the property at 9015 was re constructed, a dram swale was eliminated between that property and my own The two properties used to be at the same level, and with the increased height and drainage of 9015, as well as all of the additional construction up hill from here, things have changed dramatically The drainage onto my property has been significantly increased Each year, the storm drains have had issues in heavy rain as well as in freezing periods in the winter Additionally, my property has been suffering from standing water in the yard and on my back patio that is much greater than it had been prior to the re build next door and the density of ground cover in the general area I want to be clear that I am not opposed to Rose Kelly having the improvements to the property that she desires. However, I do seek assurance and oversight from the city to be certain that my property will not be further compromised by additional water drainage. I seek assurance from the city planning department and the city engineering department that steps that have already been discussed will be implemented and that mitigation of future flooding to my property is being adequately addressed. The city engineering has stated that they will• 1 Clean the storm drains to assure that they are functioning properly and to capacity. And to make this area a first priority to mitigate for draining issues 2. Clean the holding pond across the street from our properties to assure that it is holding the needed amount of storm water and draining properly 3. Re implement the dram swale between the two properties to properly direct excess storm water (This includes removal of the tree at the yard line to accomplish the swale, and I am currently assisting in getting bids ) 4. Accomplish other re landscaping as needed to protect my property (including home and yard) from becoming over burdened with drain water Again, I am not opposed to homeowners having the improvements that they desire. However, proper care and assurance must be given to assure that my property is not the recipient of water due to the addition of impervious surfaces and drainage that will again put me underwater again Further, I just want to assure that professionals evaluate the variable lake level to assure that additional structures and improvements will not bring the lake level up to a level that will flood my property during heavy storms. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on September 4, 2014, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Variance Request — Planning Case 2014-27 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon, that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. lk��- Kard J Eng har t, Deput Jerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this C�h day of �e,�-ke„nbe r , 2014 Notary ublic ,w KM � MEUWISSEN 3. Notary public -Minnesota '�+Y�+ •'� My Commies ion Expires Jen V, 2015 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time Tuesday, September 16, 2014 at 7 00 p m This hearing may not start until later In the evening, depending on the order of the agenda Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd Request for Variances to exceed the impervious surface Proposal limitation and the shoreland setback limitation to construct a patio on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) Applicant: Rosemary Kelly Property 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Location: A location map is on the reverse side of this notice The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps at the Meeting: 1 Staff will give an overview of the proposed project 2 The applicant will present plans on the project 3 Comments are received from the public 4 Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at www ci Chanhassen mn us/2014-27 If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Generous by Questions & email at bgenerous(a_ci Chanhassen mn us or by phone at Comments 952-227-1131 If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting Staff will provide copies to the Commission The staff report for this item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure • Subdivisions Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses Wetland Alterations, Rezonings Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation These reports are available by request At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commissions recommendation Rezonings land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial • Minnesota State Statute 519 99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s) . Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing the City Council does not Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification Date & Time Tuesday, September 16, 2014 at 7 00 p m This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda Location City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd Request for Variances to exceed the Impervious surface Proposal limitation and the shoreland setback limitation to construct a patio on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) Applicant Rosemary Kelly Property 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard Location A location map is on the reverse side of this notice The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps at the Meeting 1 Staff will give an overview of the proposed project 2 The applicant will present plans on the project 3 Comments are received from the public 4 Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at www ci Chanhassen mn us/2014-27 If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Generous by Questions & email at bgenerous(aD_ci Chanhassen mn us or by phone at Comments 952-227-1131 If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting Staff will provide copies to the Commission The staff report for this item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting City Review Procedure • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments Site Plan Reviews Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council The City Council may reverse affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation Rezonings land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519 99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification ALOYSIUS R & MARY A CHENEY DAVID L ANDERSON DELBERT R & NANCY R SMITH 9079 SUNNYVALE DR 290 GREENLEAF CT 9051 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8639 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7631 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8650 GREGORY R RENBERG 282 GREENLEAF CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7631 NORMAN C JR & KIMBERLY GRANT 9021 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8650 PHILLIP J SOSNOWSKI PO BOX 490 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-0490 STEVEN P & SANDRA L NORDLING 281 GREENLEAF CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7631 JAMES & JUDY STOFFEL 291 GREENLEAF CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7631 PAULJNESBURG 9093 SUNNYVALE DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8639 REV TRUST AGREEMENT OF JOAN M 9005 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8650 TODD A & SHELLEY L LEONE 275 GREENLEAF CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7631 JUDITH N LEWIS 9071 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8650 PETER DAVID MCINTOSH 287 GREENLEAF CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7631 RYAN D MAJKRZAK 9001 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8650 .�v �Vqt� ,r,- C", �Oma/vj w Generous, Bob From Rosemary Kelly [rkelly071 @gmail com] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 3 28 PM To Generous, Bob Subject Extension Please extend the city review through Jan 26, 2015 for the variance request for property 9015 Lake Riley Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Thank you, Rose Kelly December 22, 2014 Mr. Robert Generous Senior Planner Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mr Generous, Thank you for your time to meet with me and explain the city's position for wanting to reduce the amount of hard surface requested on the variance We do understand the desire to minimize run off into the lakes in efforts to control erosion and we appreciate staff s willingness to allow us added hard surface under our porch Although this helps, it does not fully provide the handicap accessibility we need for the home. Since meeting with you, we have considered several revisions to meet the concerns you presented. As our biggest consideration is handicap accessibility, we have removed 144 square feet toward the lake but kept the portion along the house toward the garage as well as including hard surface to allow for a connection to the rear of the garage The garage was built with garage doors in both the front and the back This allows a handicap person to enter the garage in the front and then have access to the back yard and patio without maneuvering a wheel chair through the home (see attached image #1) A person can simply use the rear door for easy wheel chair access to the back of the home and lake Having the additional hard surface extend from below the porch to the garage is essential in providing handicap accessibility to the lakeside of the house In addition, it allows the most level access to the lake. We request for a total of 350 square feet for the patio (see attached image #2) This revised plan meets the Americans with Disabilities Act requirement of 5 feet width along the garage door that was not in the original proposal. This addition was noted to be necessary to be handicap compliant and facilitate the access to the lake and patio through the garage with any type of mobility device. We believe this revision is a compromise to our original request that would not negatively impact the lake or neighborhood and is a reasonable consideration for handicap access The surrounding neighbors are supportive of the request The only issue raised was an overflow problem from a pond across the road that drains along our lot line This issue is not related to added hard surface but to regional ponding which is being resolved by city staff In addition, the city has supported hard surface variances on several occasions, most recently for the Fretham project that was heard the same night you first considered our request (October 7, 2014) and which had higher percentages of hard surface than us. Although they all have their individual ments it does show that nummal impacts are not detrimental to the lake Since our last meeting we have a clearer understanding of the city's rules regarding shoreland We share these concerns as homeowners on Lake Riley and value what lakes provide We do not want to harm any lake but simply enjoy them We hope this compromise to not extend any surface toward the lake but still extend toward the garage as access for our handicapped family members can be supported as a reasonable request. Thank you, Rose Kelly 9015 Lake Riley Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 ..... ..... vy• LE LAKE RILEY k fool 1 7" NOXI .A rl NOW